Comparative evaluation of casting retention using the ITI solid abutment with six cements

Abstract

The retention values of castings cemented to ITI solid abutments have not been reported in the literature. Within the limitations of this in vitro study, the results do not suggest that one cement type is better than another, but they do provide a ranking order of the cements in their ability to retain the castings. This ranking is somehow different than that obtained when the same cements are used on natural teeth. The material and surface characteristics of the implant abutment are likely responsible for this difference. Cement retention values obtained from studies that use teeth as abutments may be misleading when used in cement-retained implant-supported crowns. It is at the clinician's discretion to use a certain type of cement, based on the situation at hand.

Assessment of the tensile strength of hexagonal abutments using different cementing agents

“…17 There is some advantage to using temporary cement on implant supported crowns in situations where the possibility of prosthesis reversibility is desired, or when in doubt about permanent cementation. 8,14 Moreover, in some cases temporary cements have been used for fixation. Clinical studies justified the use of a weaker cement at first, in order to obtain reversibility of the prosthesis in case of loosen-ing of a gold screw of the CeraOne  abutment.…”

“…In this study, the results were obtained with the use of a static pressure device of 5 kgf for 10 minutes on all the samples, with the four cements used. 3,8,12,13 In the study of Akashia et al 14 (2002), to aid the tensile test, rods were laser-welded to the cylinders/ gold copings, consequently the gold cylinder did not heat and there was reduced alteration to the cervical margin. In other studies, the copies went through a waxing, embedding and casting process in order to be adapted to the respective abutments afterwards.…”

“…In other studies, the copies went through a waxing, embedding and casting process in order to be adapted to the respective abutments afterwards. 2,3,[7][8][9][10]12,13,15,16 In the present study, machined prosthetic components were used, thus a device was developed to adapt the copings to the tensile device. This device fixed the coping in such a way that no loop or groove needed to be welded to it, or fab- ricated for performing the tensile test.…”

“…However, the use of highly resistant cements has become more popular with a reliable increase in stability of the tooth-abutment/implant support of the screw connection and a high survival rate of osseointegrated implants. 8 The permanent cements commonly used for traditional prostheses resist any attempt at the removal of prostheses from the abutments, making posterior access to the implants difficult. Therefore, their use must be well indicated.…”

“…3 The dental cements used for cementing implantsupported prostheses may present different effects when compared with those used on teeth. 8 Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the uniaxial tensile strength of hexagonal abutments, used with different types of cementing agents after thermal cycling.…”